Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014 -06-11 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 1 of 9 Town of Dryden Agriculture Advisory Board June 11, 2014 Members Present : Evan Carpenter (Chair), Doug Barton, Joe Osmeloski, Kim LaMotte, and Brian Magee Conservation Board liaison: Craig Schutt Planning Board liaison: John Kiefer Town Hall Staff: Supervisor Sumner (at 8:30PM) Guests: Ron Szymanski The meeting was called to order at 7:34 PM. 1. Review and approval of minutes from May 14th. D. Barton moved to approve the minutes, J. Osmeloski seconded the motion and the minutes were unanimously passed. 2. Communication from J. Nicholson: E. Carpenter read a letter from J. Nicholson explaining the status of the Farmland Protection Grant. The Committee is pleased with the progress. 3. Reaction to Planning Board minutes from May. K. LaMotte thanked Mr. Kiefer for being brave enough to attend the Ag Committee meeting as our liaison. After reading the Planning Board minutes from last month, she is wondering what the Planning Board has against the agricultural community. Mr. Kiefer expressed his belief that there appears to be a broad lack of understanding on what the “Right to Farm” means. He had never heard the expression before last month’s Agriculture Advisory meeting. There was a lot of discussion at the meeting last time with folks that have been educated (about Agriculture) and other folks not so sure of what it is all about. He believes that folks may not have understood the degree to which the zoning regulations in Dryden are inconsistent with the New York State Agriculture and Markets Laws. At the end of the Planning Board meeting, the next big step was for the members to get on the Ag and Markets website and read the state laws that are supported through Ag and Markets. They can develop a better understanding so the next time the topic comes up, we will have a common background. E. Bieber related a comment from the Conservation Board meeting made by Milo Richmond who asked everyone to remember that we all come from different backgrounds and thus view the same idea in vastly different ways. K. LaMotte asked if the Planning Board will realize, after reading the Ag and Markets information, that is the law or will they push to have Dryden’s version. J. Osmeloski said it doesn’t matter because Ag and Markets law supersedes the other. D. Barton said you have to also realize that most farmers in this community don’t want to have a junk yard. His parts/junk are hidden in the woods but he wanted to keep them until he could get a decent rate on scrap metal. He was able to make $3000 from his scrap last year but if he had sold it when the market was down, he would not have gained as much. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 2 of 9 J. Kiefer pointed out that most of the farms around here are clean as a whistle and you can tell that they really care about that. There is a minority of folks that are the opposite. But again, he feels there is some lack of understanding the state laws on the topic. C. Schutt said that there have been two towns in this county have already tested challenging Ag and Markets laws and Ag and Markets won both times. (Enfield and Groton). The question is then, why would you even go there? D. Barton said the most offensive comments that were made was that the definition of being in an ag district means that you can get away with anything you want to and that it isn’t a right but a dictatorship. E. Bieber asked the committee to step back and remember that the Planning Board is coming at this from one perspective, the Conservation Board from another perspective and you all from a third perspective that is foreign to those on the other boards. She used the example of the Dryden Lake Trail and the devastation from the perspective of the Conservation Board. D. Barton said they can feel that way about the Dryden Lake Trail but some of those weeds may be toxic to his horses. The committee was also challenged to read the minutes from the other boards. Most members feel they are too busy to read the minutes unless there is a particular reason to. E. Carpenter said he is too busy to keep track of everyone else’s business. He knows there are a lot of swords out there swinging around but he is not going to worry about ducking or looking to see where they are coming from until he hears the “whoosh”; then he starts looking. D. Barton said he has a beautiful farm that people admire all the time and that didn’t come by because he sat in a chair and let it go. His family has been farming that farm for 165-170 years and they have been good stewards of the land but it is becoming harder and harder to keep that stewardship because of policies that are going to cost the farmers money but no one is willing to pay those fees for them. It has costs us money, time, blood sweat and tears, marriages, etc to keep that farm going. There isn’t anybody that clean air, clean water and clean soil are more important to than the farmers. He has had his water tested and it is pure enough that he could bottle and sell it. D. Barton had a conversation this morning with the WHCU station manager but spent a lot of the conversation biting his tongue. He agreed with J. Kiefer that the biggest thing is education, the difference between what he has been doing (living, support his family, maintain a tradition that has been in my family forever) and if the EPA is coming in to put stringent regulations on his farming, he will have to get out. E. Carpenter added that when you have some far off entity dictate what best management practices are, someone in an ivory tower, for everyone doesn’t necessarily work for this location because of the funding that is required for best management practices. We all would love to have nice white picket fences and pristine driveways but it is difficult to accomplish in the way they want it accomplished. You don’t want your driveway to wash away so you do what you can to divert the water, you try to keep the streams where they belong, you riprap them the best you can because it is a value to you, not because you are worried about the trout 10 miles down the stream, it is because you don’t want the stream eating up 5 acres of topsoil. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 3 of 9 D. Barton added that at a board meeting, he pointed out that our farm was there long before the city of Ithaca was there and just because now the head waters of their water supply is on his property, they are trying to tell him how to farm. He is seriously offended by that. They have been drinking his water for all these years. He pointed out that they have already polluted their lake. C. Schutt said that having worked with the best management practices, they are scientifically sound practices but for a small farm, unless there is some kind of incentive, to put them in the way the natural resource conservation services designed them, it is impossible. D. Barton said there used to be some incentives but the problem is that in order to take advantage of those incentives, you have to do exactly what they say and how to do it. E. Carpenter and C. Schutt agreed that regulations force farmers to “over build”. For example, E. Carpenter put in a drop box with concrete that had to be 12 inches. His friend pointed out 3 inches was sufficient and asked how much was paid for through an incentive. E. Carpenter replied that he was getting 75% paid for which means that the extra 9 inches of concrete (which weren’t necessary in the first place) were being paid for with incentive money. B. Magee was granted $90,000 for a project but he had to pay taxes on it. E. Carpenter continued regarding the drain box, saying that he got 3 different opinions on where the cut should be. In the end, he had to add stone and fill to get the water to run up before it drained into the box because all three opinions were wrong. This is the kind of thing that happens when farmers have to work with engineers that are sitting in an office that never get out and get their boots wet. K. LaMotte said the bottom line is that the farmers cannot do whatever they blessed well please. C. Schutt added that farmers are highly regulated. If they do anything that causes problems and DEC comes in and finds it, they will be fined. Basically any farm can be considered a CAFO if the DEC determines they are not doing something right. They can fall under the same rules as the big farms and the DEC has the right to come in and make any farm a CAFO. J. Osmeloski said the DEC came onto his farm and made him move his manure pile which they said was too close to the stream. It was within 30-40 feet from the stream and the placement was due to convenience. When he was asked to move it, he was agreeable because it made sense. D. Barton said he was told he had to put eaves on his barn but he hasn’t done it because it would be a waste of money. The first winter snow slide off the roof would rip the eaves off so it didn’t make sense. C. Schutt said that J. Kiefer wasn’t on the Planning Board when the CEAs failed. C. Schutt said that from the Conservation Board’s perspective, there was nothing wrong with the CEAs (he, personally, had disagreed with the Chair about some of the CEA boundaries). Now there is an open space plan in the works and the Conservation Board keeps asking what the farmers are afraid of, why are they scared? D. Barton said that when people in power say those things, it is really frightening. J. Osmeloski said if the Ag and Market laws supersede the Town laws, then do we care? It is the review of the agriculture districts every 8 years that worries him. The 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 4 of 9 Planning Board had discussed the possibility of changing the agriculture districts. The worry is that the ag districts could be reduced. C. Schutt said the Open Space Plan is intended to be part of the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan is where they make laws from. He cautioned the farmers to be careful on how far some of this stuff goes. E. Carpenter pointed out that now, if someone buys a house in an agriculture district, realtors are required to show the prospective homeowners and have them sign off on the Right to Farm law; that way new homeowners become aware of the agriculture operations near them. J. Kiefer took the opportunity to thank the Ag Committee for their determination to fix the zoning laws and their pursuit of the farmland protection grant. It is great that you participate in local government and it is clear there are broad misunderstandings. E. Carpenter said part of the reason that the Ag Committee got organized was because we realized there were folks out there who are having rules shoved down their throats. The farmers are tired of eating as much as they have been eating and we want to explain why it doesn’t taste good to us. We are not asking them to eat the same stuff we are required to eat but understand what we have to go through. They can empathize with the farmers. J. Kiefer is hoping that the Planning Board will read up on the farm laws and at the very least understand the state laws and regulations. He thinks that the Farmland Protection plan may shine some light on the issues and problems the farmers deal with. The group started talking about open space in relation to the definition and question that they sent to the Conservation Board. They were happy about the edited definition but many agreed with D. Barton who sees the Open Space Plan as another attempt at CEAs. The Ag Committee has asked the Conservation Board what they plan on doing with the Open Space Plan. Why were they asked to define “Open Space”? J. Osmeloski said this Committee was concerned that the Open Space Plan will simply replace the CEAs. The group all agree that is a major concern. The UNAs are acceptable, the group agrees that certain areas need protection but the UNAs don’t put any further restrictions on the farmers like the CEAs potentially could have. D. Barton believes that the people making these decisions for the farmers haven’t got a clue; they are not walking in our shoes nor are they willing to. J. Osmeloski was originally in favor of the CEAs but once the CEAs became ¾ of our Town, that was ridiculous and he couldn’t support it anymore. C. Schutt said the goal right now is to come up with a definition for Open Space that all of the Boards can agree on. The group discussed what the purpose of the Open Space Plan was; at the Conservation Board meeting, Supr. Sumner said that it will eventually be part of the Comprehensive Plan. Once in the plan, it will be used to guide the Town Board. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 5 of 9 C. Schutt pointed out that the volunteer boards can say whatever they want but when it comes to regulations, that is the Town Board. Maybe this Committee wants to send something to the Town Board to verify that the direction of the Planning Board is the direction the Town wants to go. J. Osmeloski is interested in knowing if the Town Board feels the comments made at the Planning Board meeting are acceptable. He is offended. He understands that folks might not like some of the laws regulating farmers. If so, they can try to change the laws. In response to a Planning Board comment regarding farm size, the Committee disagreed. They feel a couple large farms in the area are beneficial for many reasons including a market for goods (chicken farmers can supply the large farms and still be successful – an example from New Jersey was offered), the opportunity to purchase the used equipment when larger farms upgrade and lower prices on products that the farmers have to purchase. R. Szymanski added his concern regarding the minutes. He said it presumes there is a problem with agriculture in Dryden. He questioned why there would be any discussion about regulation or controls; he would like to know what the premise is for changing the status of agriculture in Dryden. E. Carpenter shared his remembrance of an event many years ago, before the Right to Farm law, when there was an issue about cleaning up all the farm yards and getting rid of the used equipment, etc. They started to pass out citations. Someone demonstrated that the public was throwing trash onto the farmer fields but that wasn’t being addressed; it was the used equipment that was being ticketed even though the farm land and crops were being negatively affected by the public. R. Szymanski said that was a great point because if you don’t know agriculture then you don’t know how important parts are. An outsider wouldn’t know just how valuable those used parts are. Supr. Sumner said that everyone knows of a farm that has old equipment that will never be used again. The Committee strongly disagreed with her assessment of the equipment’s value. Supr. Sumner pointed out that average citizens are only permitted to have one unregistered vehicle unless it is covered or in a building. K. LaMotte pointed out that Ag and Markets allows the farmers to keep used equipment for parts so why is the Town even looking at this? Supr. Sumner said local governments can have stricter laws than NYS and our zoning laws are based on the concerns of the residents. C. Schutt referred to the previously mentioned court cases. Ron Szymanski feels people move into this area because we are rural; because people feel free to live, this isn’t a controlled community. B. Magee reminded the Committee that the Amish have a good use for the stuff that even the farmers up here are done with. The ability to provide them with inexpensive parts that otherwise would have had to be custom made is part of the farmer experience. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 6 of 9 There was a discussion with Supr. Sumner regarding a subcommittee meeting with representatives from all four volunteer boards. J. Osmeloski offered the following resolution: The Dryden Agriculture Advisory Committee hereby offers an open invitation to members from the Planning Board who has concerns about agriculture in the community. The Committee is interested in understanding the concerns the non- agriculture community in Dryden in anticipation of finding common ground in the Open Space discussion. D. Barton seconded the motion. All members approved. As part of the discussion, E. Carpenter suggested the Ag Committee join the Planning Board at the next meeting on the 26th. The goal isn’t to overwhelm the Planning Board but to gain some understanding. Open Space Plan: Supr. Sumner handed out a copy of the first couple of pages from the New York State Open Space Plan. The State definition of Open Space comes from this plan. The idea of an Open Space Plan has been considered by the Conservation Board for years. Then the recreation master plan was completed and was considered in terms of how it fits into the OSP which led to thinking about how it is going to fit into the Comprehensive Plan. It will be useful to the Town by informing some of the zoning decisions, and to give the Town a guideline about how to approach potential property or resources, donations of land, etc. D. Barton said one of the main concerns with the Comprehensive Open Space plan is what restrictions are going to come from that. Supr. Sumner reminded the Committee that this is just a plan, it doesn’t create any regulations. The zoning tried to make some of the things in the plan a reality. D. Barton pointed out that people don’t realize this might be just a plan but the next generation might see it as law. Already it is getting harder and harder to deal with what is in place now. Supr. Sumner brought up the 1968 Master Plan that didn’t actually force any action, but was a suggestion. Today, we want to encourage preservation of agricultural land. It doesn’t mean you can’t develop your land. It does mean that we might not let a development on the banks of a water supply; we all want good water. D. Barton made the point that we (the farmers) have been good stewards of the land. We don’t build building or barns on stream banks; we know enough. We don’t need a regulation to tell us that. J. Osmeloski added that the plan will develop and from that plan, someone will try to make regulations. C. Schutt added that Supr. Sumner said that it gets into the Comprehensive Plan and then when they review zoning, they try to create regulations. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 7 of 9 R. Szymanski feels the big issue here that all communities have to debate, is property rights versus the master plan. Who has the better plan, a government agency or the average guys who know how to manage their land? Supr. Sumner pointed out that her job is to manage the community. She is all in favor of people managing their property. J. Osmeloski agrees that managing the community might work. E. Carpenter feels he should be able to do what he wants with his property to make it pretty but Supr. Sumner pointed out that she has to make sure that the neighbors are not affected. E. Carpenter sees it as making laws and regulations on other people’s property. Supr. Sumner sees it more as codifying what we expect our neighborhoods to be like, how it is going to be developed. J. Osmeloski said he agreed with Supr. Sumner that she has to balance the issues of the community and trying to meld all the interests together to make everyone happy. It is a tough problem but that is why we have the various committees. R. Szymanski said it is about consensus which is how communities survive. If it is an open process generally a majority of people will be happy. Supr. Sumner said it is about education and communication. She realized after a few years in office that laws are not the issue, enforcement is. E. Carpenter asked if a citizen can bring a suit through the EPA or DEC who will sue a land owner on their behalf if they feel the land owner has violated a water pollution law? Yes. So a private citizen can bring a suit against another private citizen and the citizen who brought the suit isn’t out a penny but the farmer that is defending himself will be out a lot of money. C. Schutt doesn’t think they would actually bring a lawsuit but they will certainly investigate and they will enforce mitigation. E. Carpenter pointed out that the private citizen is not out anything but the farmer has to deal with onerous mitigation for an action over which they may not have any control. Supr. Sumner said it would have to be a fairly severe wrong for the EPA or DEC to require mitigation. C. Schutt said there are laws about putting water on someone else’s property. E. Carpenter understands that there are rules out there but if it rains 3 inches overnight, there isn’t much a person can do but they still have to defend themselves. Even if the government agency acknowledges the rainfall, the farmer still has to fight the government agency to prove his innocence. Supr. Sumner said she understands the farmers’ fear of that happening but then asked if the farmers are aware of it ever happening. E. Carpenter indicated that he is very aware of that happening. J. Osemloski said that there are so many regulations and some are so unbelievable that you don’t know you are breaking the law sometimes. D. Barton said that a couple of years ago the County put in a french drain along the edge of the road and ended in one of his better hay fields. He offered to buy more tile to extend the ditch to the stream but the County refused to do it because it could make them liable for polluting the creek. Now it runs across the now useless field and into the creek. 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 8 of 9 C. Schutt has done some searching and found the Guide to Planning and Zoning Laws of New York State. He read two sections to the Committee. The sections are inserted below with more information attached. Supr. Sumner believes we are within those guidelines. K. LaMotte reminded her that during the prior discussion about used equipment laying around, Supr. Sumner had said that the Town can pass rules that are stricter than Ag and Markets. She doesn’t believe the Town can do that. C. Schutt agreed that the stricter regulations wouldn’t apply in Ag districts. Ag and Market Laws in an Ag district supersede local laws. K. LaMotte thinks the Town agricultural district should follow the County agricultural districts rather than having two different areas. C. Schutt doesn’t feel the Town shouldn’t be enacting laws that go against Ag and Market law. Supr. Sumner summed up the basic fact that almost everyone in the Town agrees preserving the rural character of the Town is a priority. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Erin A. Bieber Deputy Town Clerk 6/11/2014 DRAFT Page 9 of 9